not if you are an authoritarian government which maintains power through violence. here Putin hits two birds with one stone: he gets rid of a problematic demogr

not if you are an authoritarian government which maintains power through violence. here Putin hits two birds with one stone: he gets rid of a problematic demographic and attempts to achieve political/geographic gains to ensure Gazprom lives on and pay dividends to his offsprings. Xi faces similar problem. His growing number of unemployed, educated, unwed single male is another source of anxiety. The last thing he needs is a massive Tianmen Square event spreading and his button men unwilling to push the button. Not to mention internal competition from the opposition (Zhang Zemin faction). All in all, we are headed for uncharted waters. For the first time we have more old people than young in many developed economies, and governments face a three prong dillema with only two that they can save: economy, housing and health care. No country can have all three, you can have two but one needs to be sacrificed. ex. Japan sacrificed its economy but kept its housing and health care intact by ensuring homogenity to continue. Israel also does the same to a degree (since thats the point of its existence). UK sacrificed housing to continue its economy and health care. Canada did the same. It boils down to do you want to open up immigration and allow them to keep your economy going strong? Different countries have different needs and wants. Korea seems to be experimenting with immigration/multicultural society more actively than Japan which clearly has signaled it will not change. The countries that have chosen economy over homogenous population are definitely having their moment in Scandinavia and Germany.